New Search
Historic and Cultural Resources <br />that could contain intact archaeological deposits. Recordation, sampling, and analysis of such <br />deposits would reveal .whether they contain archaeological materials and retain integrity <br />sufficient to qualify for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. <br />Although areas that currently contain standing structures have a lower probability of containing <br />intact archaeological deposits, archaeological monitoring of these locations could occur when <br />buildings are removed and before construction of the courthouse begins. Trenching of basement <br />areas also could be used to test for historic privies or other subsurface shaft features and deeply <br />buried prehistoric deposits that might be present. If intact archaeological deposits are <br />encountered in these areas, archaeologists should then develop a research design, schedule, and <br />budget for data recovery excavations, analysis, report preparation, and interpretation of <br />archaeological remains. <br />Alternative 1, Option A <br />The Oregon state historic preservation officer should be consulted before actions are taken that <br />may adversely affect historic properties. A memorandum of agreement between the GSA and <br />the state to outline mitigation measures could then be developed to address impacts. Mitigation <br />measures might include altering or limiting the scale of the new building; further documenting <br />historic structures that would be affected; and providing public interpretive signs regarding the <br />historical significance of affected properties. The memorandum of agreement may also include <br />consultation with local authorities to plan for the protection of historic properties. Consultation <br />may address whether properties that have been determined eligible for the National Register <br />should be nominated for listing. <br />Alternative 1, Option B <br />The Oregon state historic preservation officer should be consulted before actions are taken that <br />may adversely affect historic properties. A memorandum of agreement between the GSA and <br />the state to outline mitigation measures could then be developed to address impacts. <br />Mitigation measures could include altering or limiting the scale of the new building in order to <br />-., avoid impacts on the historic properties located south of the site. Given the limited area of <br />Alternative 1, option B, this mitigation measure may not be feasible. <br />Alternative 2, Option A (Preferred Alternative) and B <br />The Oregon state historic preservation officer should be consulted before actions are taken that <br />may adversely affect historic properties. A memorandum of agreement between the GSA and <br />~ the state to outline mitigation measures could then be developed to address impacts. <br />Because the Agripac office building is a good example of industrial craftsman architecture and is <br />one of the few remaining stone and concrete block buildings in Eugene, it is potentially eligible <br />L_ <br />,, <br />New Federal Courthouse 73 Final EIS <br />